Spring budget 24: Military spending continues to grow at the expense of climate funds and overseas aid

Dr Stuart Parkinson is Co-chair of the UK branch of the Global Campaign on Military Spending (GCOMS-UK) and Executive Director of Scientists for Global Responsibility (SGR).

Summary

In the Chancellor’s Spring Budget, the UK’s core military spending rose to £54.2bn this financial year (2023-24), following the large multi-year budget increases announced in 2020 and 2023. This means military spending is expected to hit 2.3% of GDP in 2024-25, significantly above the NATO spending target. Core military spending is 4.8 times the budget for the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office – which includes overseas aid – and 7.2 times the budget of the Department of Energy Security and Net Zero – which includes climate-related spending. The government continues to fail to meet the UN target on overseas aid, while climate spending is also remains inadequate.

In more depth…

The Spring Budget 2024 (SB24)[1] revealed that the UK’s core military spending[2] reached £54.2 billion in the financial year 2023-24.[3] This was a 2.7% rise from the previous year,[4] rather than a small fall as predicted in the Autumn Statement (AS23).[5] Table 1 summarises the latest figures and how these have changed since the autumn.

Table 1 – A comparison of core military spending for 2021-25 as stated in Spring Budget 2024 (SB24)[6] and the Autumn Statement 2023 (AS23)[7]

£bn(current prices)[8]2021-222022-232023-242024-25Total 
SB2445.952.854.251.7204.6
AS2345.952.850.551.7200.9
Change    +1.8%

The figures for core military spending do not include military aid to Ukraine which totalled £7.1bn for the three financial years, 2022-25.[9] The SB24 confirmed earlier government statements which revealed that this was nearly nine times the value of humanitarian aid that the UK donated to the country over this period – a huge and disturbing imbalance. 

The core figures also do not include some other areas of military spending, in particular, veterans’ pensions, which are not directly related to current government policies on the armed forces. If all these other categories are included, the total spending by the Ministry of Defence is £71bn.[10]

The SB24 documents also stated that military spending is expected to hit 2.3% of GDP in 2024-25,[11]exceeding NATO’s spending target of 2.0%. This is in line with the government’s “aspiration” to reach 2.5%.[12]

Comparing core military spending with other civilian departmental budgets continues to be revealing, as follows.

  • In 2023-24, core military spending was 4.8 times the budget for the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office – which is responsible for the vast majority of the UK’s overseas aid budget. This is an increase when compared with figures from the autumn. It is especially worrying that the government is to continue not meeting the UN target to spend 0.7% of Gross National Income on overseas aid, while still being committed to exceeding its NATO military spending target. This undermines Britain’s contribution to helping to meet the UN Sustainable Development Goals, including efforts to eradicate international poverty and hunger. The failure of the international community to properly fund these efforts is costing millions of lives each year.
  • In 2023-24, core military spending was 7.2 times the budget of the Department of Energy Security and Net Zero – which is responsible for government spending on climate action. Again, the military has benefited more than the climate since AS23 – and during another year when climate extremes have worsened, and impacts have grown. Again, the inadequate efforts to tackle the climate crisis are costing many lives. 
  • In 2023-24, core military spending was 7.9 times the budget of the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. Again, this is an increase compared with the autumn.

In summary, although there were no new headline spending announcements for the UK’s armed forces, the government’s commitment to high military spending is undimmed – especially when compared to key areas such as overseas aid and climate action.

Dr Stuart Parkinson is Co-chair of GCOMS-UK and Executive Director of Scientists for Global Responsibility.

References